World History: Seven Years' War

A depiction of the Battle of Warburg, 1760

The Seven Years' War was a key war in shaping the world in which we live in today. For one, it has been seen as the first truly world war - Winston Churchill's A History of the English Speaking Peoples goes as far as to call it the First World War and some historians refer to it as World War Zero. American readers would likely know this war by another name - the French-Indian War. What is now Canada and the United States proved instrumental in both causing the war and making them the centre of world politics. From the Seven Years' War Britain and Prussia emerged as great powers, British rule in India became established, and the seeds of the formation of the United States were planted. Events in the Americas greatly linked to the events of Europe which linked to events in India, Africa and the Philippines. We also see a bit of a conundrum in how long the war was. From official declaration of war to the peace treaties the war lasted just under seven years (six years and eight months), fighting broke out in America in 1754, and some historians place it as an extension of earlier wars. I will warn people now; I am not a military historian so I'll be focusing less on battles as I won't be able to properly describe them.

Background

A map of the Five Nations in modern New York and Pennsylvania

Some historians, such as Fred Anderson, place more emphasis on the American origins whereas others, like Franz Szabo, place more emphasis on Europe. Thanks to how intertwined European and American affairs were during this war both are technically correct. In this section we'll look at the background of the war in Europe, the Americas, and India. We'll first look at the Americas. Since the start of the 1600s England (after 1707 Britain) and France had established colonies in North America and the Caribbean and by 1750 they started becoming prosperous. Of course sugar, tobacco, indigo, and coffee plantations in the Caribbean based on slavery made a fortune so until the 1700s London viewed its colonies in what is now the US as a bit of a backwater wilderness. However, thanks to the Navigation Acts of 1651, 1660, and 1663, which prevented non-English shipping to the colonies, they became a thriving market for English/British exports causing the population to boom from 234,000 in 1700 to 1,206,000 in 1750 (of which 242,000 were slaves). For this Britain needed a big navy to protect their maritime merchants. Meanwhile, French colonies in the Caribbean, like Martinique and Saint-Domingue, prospered and they took advantage of their position on the mainland by controlling the Mississippi through New Orleans. French Canada was not prosperous, called a 'barren frontier', but was kept as described by Admiral Roland-Michel Barren, comte de la Galissoniere, who argued that France needed to keep Canada to limit British expansion which would give their enemy an economic advantage. Finally we have the Native Americans. European settlers and traders confronted various Native American peoples including the Iroquois Five Nations, (composed of the Mohawk, Oneida, Seneca, Onondaga, and Cayuga) which became the Six Nations when joined by the Tuscarora. Europeans traded weapons with the Five Nations in return for crops, fish, and pelts where in the mid-1600s the Nations waged a vicious and bloody war of conquest to get access to more land. The Hurons, Eries, and Neutrals were dispersed from the Great Lakes and the Ohio Valley of Monongahela, Shawnee and other residents so they could have greater access to resources. The Five Nations, and other Native Americans, when they could would pit English and French colonies against one another profiting as the two went to war although at times it did backfire, especially when Anglophile, Francophile and Neutral factions threatened to tear the confederacy apart in 1701. 

Frederick II of Prussia

Meanwhile, in Europe the Anglo-French rivalry wove into geopolitics. After 1661 Bourbon France under Louis XIV became the most important continental power challenging their Habsburg opponents in Austria and Spain. The Nine Years' War (1688-97), War of Spanish Succession (1701-14) and War of Austrian Succession (1740-8) had been waged over the Bourbon-Habsburg rivalry which brought in wider states, including Britain. Until just before the Seven Years' War Britain had allied itself to Austria against their mutual rival of France as argued by the Duke of Newcastle in 1743; he argued Britain had to intervene on the continent as if France managed to dominate the continent it would manage to gain the economic and naval might to threaten Britain. Of course there were other intermittent wars which also affected India and America. Times were changing. Ostensibly dynastic wars soon developed other factors - for example thanks to the Treaty of Utrecht (1713) Britain placed economy and strategy over land grabs gaining land in Canada, and the strategic ports of Gibraltar and Minorca. The rise of Prussia in Germany is part of this. Frederick II of Prussia (r.1740-86), later called 'the Great' by nationalists, built upon the military and economic reforms of his father allowing the small state of Prussia to soon become a dominant power in Europe. Taking advantage of the disputed succession of Austria's Maria Theresa he invaded Austria to seize the wealthy lands of Silesia which he kept after the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle (1748). Similarly Russia trying to be closer to its western neighbours started intervening more and more. 

Finally we have India. After the death of Mughal emperor Aurangazeb in 1707, which you can read about here, the Mughals started going into a decline. Parts of the empire fell to the rising power of the Marathas, Mysore and other powers, over-taxation caused uprisings, and decentralised rule started to tear apart the empire. Local rulers named nawabs were increasingly granted by Aurangazeb the ability to be 'tax farmers' where they would collect taxes on behalf of the empire and they would get to keep some of the revenue raised via this. As a result over-taxation happened as some nawabs chose to profit by raising taxes to raise their profit. However, some, like the nawabs of Bengal and Oudh, eventually stopped paying taxes to the central government becoming de facto independent from the Mughals. Since the 1500s Europeans had formed the East Indian Trading Companies to trade in Asia and established fortified settlements, called factories, in India (and other areas) to trade. Among these was Pondicherry for France, Goa for Portugal and Surat for Britain. With the decline of Mughal rule Companies had to rely on their own armies to protect themselves and actively court local merchants - in the case of Bengal Jagat Sen and Omi Chand. 

Origins

Fort Duquense

Now that we've looked at the very extensive background we can finally look at the origins of the war. Originally only the European aspects were discussed but since the 1960s the American have started to be seen as being just as, or even more, important as the European origins. The focal point of this was the Ohio Valley. In the early-1740s the wealthy Penn family, of whom Pennsylvania is named after, made a deal with the Six Nations which deprived the Delawares of two-thirds of their land and opened up the region for colonial settlers. At the same time France, wanting to solidify its connection to the Canadian colonies started building forts along the Ohio River which alarmed the British who feared that the French presence would influence Native Americans to attack the settlers. There were few French settlers while instead most were traders so posed far less a threat to their land compared to their Anglo counterparts. Furthermore, religion intervened. French Jesuit missionaries had converted some tribes to Catholicism making them more disposed to be sympathetic to the French compared to the Protestant settlers. Things came to ahead when France, despite threats from Britain, built Fort Duquesne where the Allegheny and Monongehala Rivers met. A colonial militia led by the young George Washington in retaliation attacked a small French force at Jumonville Glen in May 1754 killing ten, including the commander Jumonville, causing a French retaliatory attack on Fort Necessity forcing Washington to surrender. As this was eighteenth-century diplomacy negotiation involved sending more troops to the colonies where in June 1755 the British attacked the French in Canada and then proceeded to expel the Acadians. The following month one of the most famous battle took place during the war. A force of 2,000 British troops under Edward Braddock, with a young Washington, marched to take Fort Duquesne but were ambushed by French and their Native American allies wiping out the force with Braddock even being killed. For two years massacres, atrocities, and battles took place. Hundreds of settlers were killed, around 5,000 Acadians eventually were expelled, British ships attacked the French in the Mediterranean and British forts fell in northern New York. 

As this was happening a 'Diplomatic Revolution' was being organised in Europe. As argued by Franz Szabo victory over Austria had inflated Frederick II's ego while Britain disappointed Maria Theresa by allowing the Habsburgs to lose many key lands. Frederick wanted to continue war against Austria and possibly conquer Hanover but doing so would draw in Britain as through a series of events, which deserves to be talked about by itself, George of Hanover was also George II of Britain. Frederick was unsure if France would be a willing ally as they had been during the War of Austrian Succession as another victory had the potential of making Prussia a big enough power to challenge France. The states of Europe took notice of events in North America and saw a new Anglo-French war was brewing. By 1756 Britain no longer saw Austria as a strong enough to challenge France and George II always preferred Hanover to Britain and believed that Austria was unable to defend his German kingdom. The rising power of Prussia could serve as a good alternative and an alliance was made in the 1756 Westminster Convention formalised in a proper alliance two years later. Seeing this Maria Theresa sent her foreign minister, Count Wenzel Anton von Kaunitz, to approach France who agreed to an alliance with the 1756 Treaty of Versailles as France now viewed the rising Prussia as a bigger threat to them. Hearing about the anti-Prussian alliance and bolstered by the British alliance Frederick invaded Saxony officially starting the Seven Years' War. Doing so, however, enraged Europe who saw it as an unprovoked attack allowing Tsarina Elizabeth of Russia to enter an alliance with France and Austria sending 80,000 to her new allies.

Course of the War

The Battle of Prague

In this section I'll briefly go over the land and naval battles. Prussia managed to get off to an early lead defeating the Saxon army at the Battle of Lobositz in October 1756 before it could be reinforced by the Austrians and quickly managed to occupy Saxony. Things weren't going as well for Britain. The Battle of Minorca saw the French navy defeating the British and the island fell so the angry British decided to court-martial and execute Admiral John Byng who lost the island. In America more and more forts were captured by the French and their Native American allies. Much more tribes allied to France over Britain for the earlier mentioned reasons, hence why it is called the French-Indian War in the US. Frederick, however, would also start seeing defeat. His own indecision had allowed the Austrians to occupy some of Silesia, and a year later despite winning the bloody Battle of Prague he was roundly defeated as he tried to siege the city while also fighting an Austrian counterattack. In the summer of 1757 Russia took Prussia's key fort in Memel and used it to attack the centre of the kingdom but its own logistics prevented it from doing too much damage. Seeing this Sweden intervened to take Prussian Pomerania, (which is why it is called the Pomeranian War in Sweden), and a Hungarian general, Andras Hadik, defeated Frederick even briefly occupying Berlin. Two British governments, the Duke of Newcastle and William Pitt, fell due to setbacks in America, such as the fall of Fort William Henry, forming a new coalition government which combined the two prime minister's tactics. By 1759 the French-Austrian-Russian alliance was succeeding so much that France even managed to formulate a plan to invade Britain! However, the strength of the British navy prevented this. The British navy managed to destroy the French fleets at the Battle of Lagos and Quiberon Bay scuppering these plans and allowed Britain to blockade French ports. From 1759 to 1763 the war in Europe was largely at a stalemate. Frederick's prestige had been shattered, especially by the Russians, and had only been saved by poor Russian logistics and the destroyed economies of France and Austria. In 1762 Elizabeth of Russia died and her son Peter, who loved Prussia, mediated a peace including Sweden and even placed some of his troops under Frederick's control. However, the following year Peter was ousted in a coup led by his wife, Catherine the Great, who took Russia out of the war. The war in Europe was reaching a stalemate with the combatants slipping to bankruptcy and deaths in the hundreds of thousands. However, the war was instead won outside of Europe.

I want to talk about India separately so I'll discuss the course of the war in the Americas, Africa, and Asia instead. British prime minister William Pitt believed, quite rightly, that the war would be won in the colonies over the Duke of Newcastle's plan to focus on propping up Prussia. It turned out both tactics was needed as shown in his quote by an American contemporary 'The great object of the nation is the American war...the probability of our succeeding in our main point is...much increased by the part the French take in the affairs of Germany, which turns their attention, as well as their money, from their marine, and...making expeditions to our Colonies.' French troops in America were led by the Marquis de Montcalm who managed to thrash the British, with his Native American allies, in the first half of the war capturing Fort William Henry in 1757 and Fort Carillon in 1758. However, despite this Montcalm was unable to prevent the capture of several key forts including Frontenac and finally Duquense and 1759 proved to be disastrous for the French. Under generals James Wolfe and James Murray Louisbourg and Fort Niagara fell to the British opening the way to Quebec which fell in September. At the Battle of the Plains of Abraham the British defeated the French and Six Nations despite the death of Wolfe during the battle with Montcalm also dying a day later from his wounds. Montreal was captured shortly after and the Six Nations in 1760 opted to sign a peace treaty with Britain. When Spain entered the war Britain managed to capture both Cuba and the Philippines, as well as Gaudeloupe in 1759. We also have the African front. In 1758 at the request of traders Pitt sent a fleet capturing the fort of Saint Louis in Senegal which they expanded upon later.

India and the Seven Years' War

The Battle of Plassey

In India the Seven Years' War has been known as the Third Carnatic War, the earlier two had been fought between the British East Indian Company (EIC) and the French Compagnie des Indes and had saw Robert Clive become influential for fighting in the wars. The EIC in Kalikata, (Calcutta), had been reinforcing their factory in case of French attack which made the nawab of Bengal, Siraj ud Daula, fearful. The EIC's connection to the wealthy merchants Jagat Seth and Omi Chand in accompaniment with their own might made the nawab fearful that they were working to undermine his rule. When the EIC continued fortifying Fort William Siraj attacked and local Indian troops deserted leading to the fort's capture in June 1756. What happened next has gone down in infamy from the account of the civilian commander John Zephaniah Howell. We know very little about the 'Black Hole of Calcutta' as it was soon exaggerated to justify war in India. Possibly between 64 and 68 soldiers were kept overnight in a 4.3m x 5.5m room, although Howell and some later historians argued that Siraj did not order and may not have known about the imprisonment. The next day thanks to heat and suffocation only around 23 survived. Stories soon were spread exaggerating the numbers and claiming that women and children had also been captured. It gave easy justification for the EIC to send Robert Clive from Madras (modern Chennai) to retake Calcutta and defeat Siraj. They met at the Battle of Plassey in 1757 but Crispin Bates has argued it is a bit of a stretch to call it a battle. Our earlier mentioned merchants disliked Siraj's high taxes and had made money with their EIC connections so decided to make the battle easier. They bribed a major general, Mir Jaffar, into switching sides and he did marching his troops to join Clive. As a result in a battle with over 60,000 combatants only 522 people died. Strangely the Mughal emperor, Bahadur Shah I, was pleased; he had been angry that Siraj had been stopped sending tax payments which limited attempts at reform. When the war ended in 1765 the EIC was given to them to rule over. After Plassey the EIC and their allies turned on the other Europeans in India, i.e. the French, and roundly defeated them.

Economies and Logistics

The Seven Years' War has been viewed as one of the first 'modern' wars in which the global economy and logistics had to be taken into account. For example, the Russians had failed to reform their supply lines and logistics of such a large army, the Russian army was often twice the size of that of Frederick, since their earlier war with the Ottoman Empire. This meant that although they could take Memel they were unable to properly enter Prussian lands giving Frederick time to breathe. The way the war was thought out also hinged on how they could utilise the economies and resources of their own states and hamper that of their opponents. In 1746 Frederick wrote in General Principles of War that if one wanted to succeed it was legitimate and just to coerce peoples in occupied lands into helping the war effort. Franz Szabo even uses the term 'merciless fiscal exploitation of Saxony' to describe his actions after taking Dresden where 5 million Talers of the 6 million Talers of Saxony's annual taxation went to funding Frederick's war. By the end of the war 50 million was extracted from Saxony. Britain and France were the ones fighting on all fronts so had to balance both. Hence why Britain had to balance Pitt's colonial war and Newcastle's continental one. Small contingents were sent to aid Prussia and after 1758 over £670,000 a year (£91.5 million in 2017's money) was sent to fund the Prussian war. A big part in why it is seen that the Anglo-Prussian (and later Portuguese) alliance won was due to Britain shattering the French and Spanish economy. Capturing the very rich island of Cuba and the Philippines allowed Britain to claim their wealth for itself, Saint Louis allowed Britain to have greater profits from the slave trade, and the seizing of India gave them very lucrative benefits from India trade. Even the conquer of Canada involved breaking of economic access to Quebec. Britain was also very aggressive in attacking neutral ships trading with France, as the Dutch learned, which became a policy they used until the Napoleonic Wars, and British blockades of French ports strangled the economy further. 

Why did Britain manage to do this though? Paul Kennedy has written extensively on this and has placed great emphasis on geopolitics and pre-war economics. Kennedy has argued that it is very difficult for a state to be both a continental and a world power. Although a world power France being on the continent meant that it shared land borders with its enemies which needed defending. Protecting the main base took precedence over defending America and India. In contrast Britain had the luxury of being an island offering a natural defence as a naval invasion was far more difficult although not impossible, in 1745 France (and to an extent Spain) helped Jacobite rebels invade Britain. Due to this Britain could focus far more on being a world power - a mentality which can be seen today if you look at the discourse of some of the right-wing supporters of Brexit. Events before 1754 allowed Britain to truly be a world power instead of a continental one. As mentioned earlier Britain had used its colonies to be a market for exports and was eager to take part in the Triangular Trade (slaves from Africa to the Americas whose goods were sold in Britain and the money was then used to buy more slaves). In order to make sure this trade was protected a large navy was needed. Ironic though considering how there were only a few key naval battles during the Seven Years' War and even then Britain lost one, the Battle of Minorca.

Peace and Aftermath

The expansion of British land in the US, the pinky colour is what they gained after the Treaty of Paris

Four peace treaties were signed ending the war: St Petersburg, Hamburg, Paris, and Hubertursburg. The first two, signed 1762, established status quo peace with Sweden and Russia. The other two were signed in 1763 and decided to go to pre-war borders in Europe. Thanks to Hubertursburg Prussia did manage to get Saxony and Austria to drop claims to Silesia but the real changes came thanks to the Treaty of Paris. Areas seized by Spain and France were returned to Britain and Portugal who returned the Indian factories, Guadeloupe, the Philippines, Cuba, Goree, and several Caribbean islands. Britain kept French Canada, Tobago, St Vincent and the Grenadines, Grenada, Dominica, and Florida. France also lost its land in what is now the continental US. Half of French Louisiana had been given to Spain the year before and the rest, from the Mississippi to the Appalachians, was given to Britain. However, France was just glad to keep the wealthy Guadeloupe and Voltaire dismissed Canada as 'A few acres of snow'. 

The Seven Years' War proved to be the most influential war until the First World War. Prussia had managed to establish itself as a continental power managing to survive an onslaught from France, Austria, Russia, and Sweden and thanks to Frederick managed to bounce back thanks to his immigration policies and agrarian reforms. Despite this Prussia would take a century to return to such military strength; in 1806 Prussia was defeated by Napoleon's army of French peasants at the Battle of Jena. Despite this Prussia soon became the state to imitate. The war did influence attempts to reform the Russian and French militaries to reform themselves with Russia replacing France as the key figure in Polish affairs. Over the next thirty years Russia and Prussia, and to an extent Austria, successfully divided up Poland with no interference from France. Britain came to be a great power. Before that it had been seen as second to Spain and France but thanks to the Seven Years' War the British economic and naval might made it a major player in world affairs. Thanks to the Treaty of Paris France agreed to not intervene with British client states in India giving them free reign to establish their own hegemony in India. One could become very rich via the EIC, so much so that it caused a moral panic in Britain, as it was believed that 'nabobs' like Robert Clive could use their wealth to lead a decadent life. EIC officials, and Clive was no exception, soon became as corrupt and brutal as their Indian predecessors - in 1770 misrule allowed a famine in Bengal to kill a third of the population. For a time when the Mughal emperor was captured the EIC used this to establish their rule in the north and eventually conquered the south.

The famous 1770 painting of the death of James Wolfe. Witnessing Wolfe's death are men representing England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland; a trapper for America, and a Native American. Some tribes did fight for the British although more allied themselves with the French

Finally we have events in America. Initially the colonialists had welcomed victory and had expressed their love for the British. It was not uncommon for colonial elites, like Elijah Boardmen of Massachusetts, to make themselves appear like their British counterparts like modelling their homes to resemble the landed gentry, sent their sons to London for study, and Washington even had a coat of arms made! Up until the American Revolution colonialists glamorised the Seven Years' War and some of the major images associated with the war comes from this period. Many of the expelled Acadians went on to settle in Louisiana which explains the remaining strong French aspects of Cajun culture. Tensions remained high though with the Native Americans who were some of the worst affected by the result of the war. With the French out of America they lost a bulwark against Anglo-American encroachment and soon clashes between settlers and Native Americans broke out with the 1763 Pontiac's Rebellion and an attack on Detroit by Ottawas, Hurons and others the same year. This would soon pave way for genocide and displacement which would characterise the late-eighteenth century and the nineteenth. Britain, like other combatants, were bankrupted by the war. At home and America the government raised taxes causing grievances for the colonists. Various other laws, such as emancipation for Catholics and the quartering of soldiers, upset the colonists further. As a result, these all came together resulting in the American Revolution.

Conclusion

As we've looked over today the Seven Years' War went on to shape the world we live in. Caused by politics and economics over dynastic struggles it showed a shift away from the wars of the early modern world and that of the modern. It went on to shape the major factors which would shape the modern world which would last until the Second World War: wars which covered the entire world, the importance of the Americas, British world hegemony, Prussian hegemony in Europe, and British conquest of India. The Seven Years' War, despite not being nearly as destructive or encompassing, was truly the First World War.

Thank you for reading. The next World History post will look at the American Revolution. The sources I have used are as follows:

-Daniel Baugh, The Global Seven Years' War, 1754-1763: Britain and France in a Great Power Contest, (London: Routledge, 2011)

- Patrice Louis-René Higonnet, 'The Origins of the Seven Years' War', The Journal of Modern History, 40:1, (1968), pp.57-90

-Crispin Bates, Subalterns and the Raj: South Asia since 1600, (London: Routledge, 2007)

-M.S. Anderson, Europe in the Eighteenth Century, 1713-1783, Third Edition, (London: Longman, 1987)

-Franz Szabo, The Seven Years' War in Europe, 1756-1763, (Harlow: Pearson Education Limited, 2008)

-Fred Anderson, Crucible of War: The Seven Years' War and the Fate of Empire in British North America, 1754-1766, (New York, NY: Alfred Knopf, 2000)

-Eric Foner, Give me Liberty! An American History, Fourth Edition, (New York, NY: W.W. Norton, 2014)

-Paul Kennedy, The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers: Economic Change and Military Conflict from 1500 to 2000, (New York, NY: Vintage, 1989)

Thank you for reading. For other World History posts please see our list. For future blog updates please see our Facebook or catch me on Twitter @LewisTwiby

World History: The Mughals

Today we are looking at the last of the so-called 'Gunpowder Empires': the Mughals. The Mughals are perhaps one of the most influential of India's empires with many aspects and images of India which the West has originating from the Mughal Empire. Since the 1990s India's Hindu right has been on the rise, currently the Hindu nationalist party (the BJP) is in power, and memory of the Mughals has been tense for them. The Mughals were Muslim ruling largely over Hindus and many of the Mughal's actions went on to be integral part of Indian culture, and even then many of the early conquests of the Mughals were against other Islamic rulers. Today we'll look at the Mughals to see how important they were in shaping India. We'll start with the first ruler, Babur, and go until the end of the reign of Aurangzeb so we can briefly look at how the empire started to collapse before British rule came about.

Babur and Foundations

Babur in a painting done years after his death

Late many of the other states which we've been looking at the Mughals owed their existence to the Mongols - in fact the word 'Mughal' or 'Moghul' comes from 'Mongol' and was invented in the nineteenth century to describe the empire. The Mughal Empire would be founded around 1526 by Zahir-ud-din Muhammad Babur, or Babur, who was from the Safavid Empire. Babur made claim that on one side of his family he was a direct descendant of Genghis Khan and the other side Timur. For that reason they were often called the 'House of Timur'. It is believed that his autobiography, Baburnama, was written to clarify his legitimacy based on his apparent descent. Babur would often spend his early life waging war to subjugate new areas; he managed to besiege Samarkand and win at the age 14 but he would soon lose it. After 1504 he set out for good taking his mother with him - according to the Baburnama he would occasionally give the only tent to this mother to sleep in. The same year he took Kabul which would remain his favorite place in the world; it was also a key city along the Silk Road setting up later rule in India. Kabul was very diverse with many languages and cultures coexisting, much like India whom the Mughals would later rule over. However, city life never suited Babur and Kabul's revenue was too small for him. He wrote: My desire for Hindustan had been constant. It was in the month of Shaban, the Sun being in Aquarius, that we rode out of Kabul for Hindustan. In 1505 he set out attacking the Afghans and continued the Timurid tradition a swift attacks and brutality for opponents (and those who disobeyed). Anyone who missed the night watch had their nose split in two. In 1519 he even named his son Hindal meaning 'Take India'. To show his devotion to his forces he publicly gave up drinking and claimed he was leading a jihad against the Indian forces. That way he could appeal to the piety of his forces who could martyred if they died. He also made an alliance with the Safavid shah to help his forces.

In the northern India the Islamic Delhi Sultanate had been in power. Due to the alliance with the Safavids Babur claimed his was Shia whereas the Lodi dynasty of Delhi were Sunni. This was how Babur managed to call a jihad. The Delhi Sultanate had been steadily shrinking which benefited the Mughals. Babur mixed traditional cavalry with muskets, hence why the Mughals are considered a 'Gunpowder Empire', which allowed his 1,500 soldiers to defeat the Lodi's forces of 100,000 cavalry and 1,000 elephants at Panipat outside Delhi in 1526. He soon moved into Delhi visiting the mausoleums of two holy men, Nizamuddin Auliya (d.1325) and Qutbuddin Bakhtiyar Kaki (d.1235), and Delhi soon was made his new capital. The Lodis crowned a new leader and allied themselves with the Rajputs, who wanted to expand into lands held by the Delhi Sultanate, and as they marched on Agra in 1527 they met in battle. At the Battle of Khanwa through a mixture of Babur's skill, use of cannons, and when a Hindu chief joined Babur's forces the Rajputs and Lodis were defeated. The new Mughal Empire now stretched across most of northern India.

Babur loathed and liked his new empire in India. In the Baburnama he wrote: 

Hindustan is a country that has few pleasures to recommend it. The people are not handsome. They have no idea of the charms of a friendly society, of frankly mixing together, or of familiar intercourse. They have no genius, no comprehension of mind, no politeness of manner, no kindness or fellow-feeding, no ingenuity or mechanical invention in planning or executing their handicraft works, no good flesh, no grapes or musk melons, no good fruits, no ice or cold water, no good food or bread in their bazaars, no baths or colleges, no candles, no torches, not a candlestick.

He did however praise it for being 'a large country with lots of gold and money. The weather turns very nice during the monsoon.' He praised the generations of tradespeople and how there were many, and he loved the wildlife. Babur would long for Kabul and when he died he would be buried there. Furthermore, the Baburnama would be written in Turkic, and a few poems in Persian, instead of Persian or Hindi which were more widely spoken. The Mughals are well renowned for their construction but it was more limited under Babur. Mostly they were mosques, to show his piety, including the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya which was demolished in 1992 by a Hindu mob as it was believed that a Temple of Ram was demolished to make room for it - something quite pertinent as Ayodhya is where Ram was apparently born.

The Babri Masjid

Mughal Administration and Rule

Before we look at the other Mughal rulers and how they shaped India we need to understand how the state functioned. Of course, throughout Mughal rule this did change. The empire was multi-ethnic, multi-religious, and multi-caste. After the royal family those at the top of society were the ashraf, the nobility, who were made of Muslim families who had migrated from the Persian, Arabian or Turkish-central Asian regions. There were also the mansabdar, a rank introduced by Akbar, often revolving around the military and sometimes the civil service. A mansabdar earned his standing (of course society was patriarchal) based on his zat and suwar. Zat was his rank bestowed by the emperor which often determined the maximum limit of soldiers they had, and suwar was his horses and riders. A mansabdar of 3000-zat 1500-suwar during war had to provide 1500 cavalry but during peace it would be a lot less as that way they could get more money. This system does appear confusing as it was subject to change and historians still are debating what zat and suwar were at any time. There was also a zamindar, landowner, who were stronger in northern India compared to the south as Mughal rule was always stronger in the north. Traditionally zamindars acted a tax collectors for emperors collecting revenue from ryots (peasants) but under the Mughals their role expanded to include police, judicial and military positions as well. Thanks to the mansabdars and zamindars the Mughal system continued when time of trouble happened - something periodic at the start of the reign of each new ruler - although by the end of the Mughals this did cause issues for the state. For this reason some historians, like J.C. Heesterman, have argued that the Mughals were really of confederation of princes with the emperor being more of a powerful figurehead, however, this view has been contested. Of course, regardless the emperor was at the top of society. During military campaigns they often personally went out to war, or their sons would. Like with the early Ottomans and Safavids succession wars would break out unless powerful or favorite sons managed to remove them early on. Babur's son, Humayun, learnt this the hard way when he made his brothers governors and went on to regret it when they vied for power themselves. The harems could also hold sway. Women in court could hold informal power and female relatives of the emperor could exert influence through their husbands.

The expansion of the Mughals

Humayun and the Sur Interregnum

Humayun (1530-40 and 1555-6) has largely been shafted by historians due to the successes of his father and son. Unlike his father he was more interested in magic, mysticism, and astrology compared to fighting, but he was intensely religious - a court figure, Abdul Karim, would be called Abdul due to Karim being a name of God. As mentioned earlier women could play a great influence in court and Humayun's half-sister, Gulbadan, wrote one of his biographies showing how he was peaceable and humane as a ruler. However, Humanyun's rule was never as secure as Babur's. In 1532 a Pashtuni leader, who had started to become prominent under Babur, Sher Khan Suri took hold of Rohtas in Bihar who managed to smuggle in his soldiers who were disguised as women. Soon enough Gaur, Bihar, and Jaunpur (all in the lower Ganges region) fell to Suri. In 1538 Humayun set out to confront Suri in Bengal 'and unfurled the carpet of pleasures', i.e. his stay in Bengal would be in luxury. Everything went wrong at once. His brother, Hindal, executed Humayun's spiritual guide as his older brother Kamran marched from Punjab to stake his claim. In June 1539 Humayun's forces met Suri's at Chausa and the Mughals were roundly defeated. As they had dug in this made the artillery became useless and a bridge collapse caused a great part of the Mughal forces to drown where they were 'dragged by the crocodile of death down into the waters of annihilation'. Humayun himself was almost drowned until he was saved by Shamsuddin Atga of Ghazna whose wife, Jiji Anaga, was later made Akbar's nurse. With his brothers carving up their own domains and with Suri forming his own empire Humayun fled to Kandahar and then to the Safavid Empire. 

While in the Safavid Empire Humayun became close to Shah Tahmasp and Tahmasp finally managed to get the Mughal nobility to convert the Shia Islam, the attempts to convert Babur were largely unsuccessful. For a long time after Safavid-Mughal relations remained strong - when Kamran asked Tahmasp to hand over his brother in return for Kandahar the shah refused. Tahmasp later offered Humayun his aid in retaking India in return for Kandahar, something which he agreed to. Thanks to this period in exile the Mughal nobility would become greatly influenced by Persian culture and when Kabul went back into Humayun's hands it became a major center for Safavid artists. Meanwhile, back in India Suri's reforms proved to greatly shape India and later Mughal rule functioned due to his reforms. The precursor to the modern rupee began under the Sur dynasty; the Grand Trunk Road was constructed which still links Bengal to Peshawar; 1,800 caravanserias and numerous fountains were set up between Sonargon in Bengal and the Indus; an efficient policing system was established to keep the roads safe; and on the Jhelum river, near modern Islamabad, the fortress of Rohtas was built which is a UNESCO Heritage Site today. Suri's reign ended quickly in 1545. He would expand the Mughal lands and while sieging the Kalinjar fort of the Rajputs a rocket ricocheted off of the fort's walls and exploded near Suri. Just as he died the fortress fell. His sudden death left his new empire weakened so Humayun could retake his empire in 1555. After dealing with Kamran he reinstalled himself in Delhi. Humayun's reign would soon end. As the call to prayer was issued Humayun tripped down the steps of his library tower leading to his death three days later. One scholar quite unflatteringly wrote that he 'stumbled into death as he had stumbled through life'. His tomb would become a place of pilgrimage after completion.

Akbar

Akbar

Akbar, sometimes called Akbar the Great, is seen as the greatest Mughal, and sometimes Indian, ruler. However, a great part of this was due to looking at his reign retroactively from the reign of his great-grandson Aurangzeb. Akbar has been seen as the humane ruler compared to Aurangzeb's tyranny despite how early in his reign Akbar would have many of his enemies who surrendered executed. He also personally threw a foster brother from a balcony in order to execute him. Also, in order to test whether children could learn to speak without being taught he had infants raised in isolation by nurses who refused to speak to them and a few years later it turned out they were mute and mentally retarded. Although he was barely literate, John Keay believed that he may have been dyslexic, Akbar was a great patron of the arts and is one of the most well recorded Mughal emperors thanks to scholar and Grand Vizier Abu Fazl. Akbar saw himself as being Indian instead of Turkic - he had great respect for his nurse Jiji Anaga, and Shamsuddin Atga would become an important official under him. He had the Baburnama translated into Persian and he oversaw a library of over 24,000 books of Hindi, Persian and Turkic origin. His own book, Akbarnama, has been seen as a great text of Indian literature. Art, literature and architecture boomed under Akbar's patronage although only the nobility could truly engage with this. Using firearms effectively with elephants and cavalry until his death in 1605 the Mughal Empire expanded exponentially. Kabul, Kandahar, modern Pakistan, Gujarat and Bengal were all added into the empire. This brought millions more people into the empire, Abu Fazl believed that around 100 million people lived there, bringing in more ethnicities, religions and economies. As a result the mansabdars were made.

A scene from Akbar's Ramayana

Akbar has been noted for his religious tolerance - although it could be due to pragmatism being a Muslim ruler in a primarily Hindu state. Akbar ended the jizya, the tax on non-Muslims, had a Muslim scholar al-Badauni to translate the Mahabharata and Ramayana, and had a personal copy of the Ramayana in 1588 depicting 176 superb illustrations. He encouraged Muslim, Hindu, Jat, and Christian scholars to have debates and after a spiritual moment while hunting in 1578 he took up yogic and Sufi practices, became a vegetarian, and started promoting religious syncretism more. He ate with the third Sikh guru and even created his own religion, Din-i-Ilhai. This religion primarily took from Hinduism and Islam but also brought elements from Jainism, Buddhism, Christianity and Zoroastrianism, and Akbar never had it enforced. At most 18 people joined the new religion and that was likely due to them trying to get into good graces with Akbar. However, his tolerance did upset the ulema (the Islamic religious community) and when Muslim revolts broke out some did issue fatwas against him. The economy expanded and changed under Akbar's rule as well, so much so that caste distinctions started to become blurred. Vaishyas (merchants), especially in coastal cities, started becoming richer than kshatriyas (warriors) and brahmas (religious elite and teachers). Lower castes could even get involved by converting to Islam and joining the civil service. Textiles and cotton soon became profitable and the Mughals soon became one of the leading producers of cotton. Akbar ensured that the Khyber Pass and Grand Trunk Road were well defended to ensure trade could happen unaffected by crime and sea trade expanded when the empire expanded into Bengal and Gujarat. The empire came into proper contact with Portugal, who established themselves in Goa in 1510, and with the Ottoman Empire further out. 

Jahangir and Shah Jahan

Akbar's last years were faced with a revolt from his son Salim but they made amends thanks to Akbar's mother so that upon his death in 1605 Salim could become emperor Jahangir. He was truly India - his mother, Jodhai Bai, was a Rajput princess. Jahangir's reign has often been viewed through the lens of his later reign which was consumed by drink and opium. Despite being much shorter his reign was very similar to his father's: conquest, crushing of rebellions, and consumption of the arts. Curiously he could be tolerant to rebels unless he had a severe hatred for them: one, Malik Ambar, was an Abyssinian eunuch whom was depicted in a painting being decapitated and shot with an arrow by Jahangir surrounded by angels. Women in court became very powerful under Jahangir, especially during his times of indulgence in opium, and one in particular was his wife Nur Jahan. Competent, athletic and intelligent she managed to ensure that she could be the true power behind the throne. She even got Jahangir's most loved son Khurram was married to her niece, Arjumand Banu, who in turn would become very powerful herself. Chinese historian Craig Clunas has written extensively on how conspicuous consumption shows social power - we see this in the Mughal court. To show that Safavid-Mughal relations were strong the painter Bishndas shows Jahangir hugging, or more like crushing, the Safavid ruler. Many paintings were done by Ustad Mansur depicting animals in his menagerie, and later Khurram's court, including a Siberian crane (which was not formally described until the 1770s) and even a dodo! It is believed that two dodos were gifts from the Portuguese. Similarly, the English East India Company seeking trade with India sent Sir Thomas Roe to meet with Jahangir. Roe described the life at court and lamented Jahangir's desire for luxury goods: wine, unusual games, European paintings, and even a carriage for Nur Jahan. He even once lamented how his personal gift to Jahangir was turned down as it was only worth 400 rupees.

Ustad Mansur's depiction of a dodo

The Red Fort today

In 1628 Shah Jahan, Khurram, became emperor and he has become known as the 'Great Builder' for his building projects. He had fought Malik Ambar and resolved to conquer Deccan (in southern India) after. Shah Jahan was devoted to his wife Mumtaz Mahal whom was given the title 'Queen of the World'. When she died giving birth to her fourteenth child in sixteen years in 1631 Shah Jahan was inconsolable. He wrote: The pleasures of worldly rule and kingship, which were mine with her by my side, have now become burdens and increasing sources of grief! Starting in 1632 he commissioned a grand mausoleum for her which would become the Taj Mahal costing 32 million rupees, or US $827 million in today's money. On top of the Taj Mahal we have the magnificent Peacock Throne, which went missing in the eighteenth-century, was commissioned and Shah Jahan even built an entire city: Shahjahanabad. This walled city is today's Old Delhi containing spacious living areas for nobles, a large mosque, and the Red Fort - a key building in Indian iconography today. A Persian architect, 'Ali Mardan Khan, was hired to create the Shalimar Gardens in Lahore and 'Abdul Hamid Lahori was hired to write the Padshahnama receiving 3,000 rupees and his own weight in gold. One chronicler wrote accurately that 'The treasury cried out, "Don't touch me"'. However, Shah Jahan regularly faced issues. In 1630 a famine led to 2 million starving to death, revolutions broke out among the Rajputs and Sikhs, and there was even a war with Portugal. During the wars his son Aurangzeb rose to prominence and soon became a key ruler. When rumors of Shah Jahan's health was going Aurangzeb seized Agra and imprisoned his father and sister, Jahanara, until Shah Jahan's death in 1666.

Aurangzeb

Aurangzeb

Aurangzeb has been known as a tyrannical and intolerant emperor ruling with an iron fist and enforcing Islam onto South Asia. Especially compared to Akbar he has been seen as the stereotypical Oriental despot draining the peasants dry as he enforced his religion onto them. However, in recent years his idea has been challenged, such as by Ayesha Jalal. It is true that Aurangzeb did rule with an iron fist, as did many rulers, and was deeply pious his rule has started to be seen as being more pragmatic than anything else. He did strictly enforce prohibition, poetry, and wearing gold colored clothing in court his other policies are seen as combining piety with pragmatism. Bringing back the hated jizya and reducing spending on lavish tombs (his own mausoleum is quite small) and consumption has been seen as a way to save money after the battering the treasury received under Shah Jahan. His destruction of Hindu temples have now been noted as being in retaliation for rebellious Hindu nobles. At times he did build Hindu temples and brought many more Hindus into the buraeucracy. Of course, this pragmatism was still at the expense of the non-Muslim citizens of the empire who became very disgruntled. For one, when Sikhs refused to convert he had Guru Tegh Bahadur executed in 1675. Under Aurangzeb three things from earlier Mughal rulers continued: expansion, economic growth, and conspicuous consumption. The consumption was different to that of earlier emperors combining piety with Shah Jahan's construction projects. Many mosques were made under Aurangzeb and some could be very extravagant, like the Babshahi mosque in Lahore. Expansion of traditional industries (like textiles), trade and taxation allowed the Mughals to be the largest economy in 1690 with it having a quarter of the estimated GDP of the world and monthly income was ten times that of Louis XIV's France (who made Versailles). Conquest had brought most of southern India under Mughal rule, only the southern tip of the subcontinent escaped Mughal rule, by his death in 1707.

The later collapse of the Mughals began in proper under the reign of Aurangzeb, Annemarie Schimmel even says 1707 is the end of the Mughals despite the last emperor being deposed by the British in 1858. Many revolts broke out with several coming from the Jats, Pashtuns, and Sikhs. The most important, however, is the rise of the Marathas. The Marathas were founded under a warrior called Shivaji Bhonsle who began almost a guerrilla campaign against originally the Sultanate of Bijapur and later the Mughals after a brief stint of imprisonment in Agra in 1668. Shivaji was crowned in 1674 founding the Marathas and began plundering Mughal, and Bijapur, lands to enrich his kingdom. Maratha forces would demand money from villages and towns, or they would burn it down, and then the Mughals would take their share leading the settlement to become impoverished. As Shivaji was Hindu and pushed Marathi over Persian he attracted local support and had locals blame the Mughals for their woes. Aurangzeb could have easily crushed the Marathas but he chose a defensive course by securing forts in Deccan assuming if they couldn't take forts they would be cut off from income and weapons. This failed and Aurangzeb's son, Muhammad Akbar, even fled to the Maratha court declaring himself emperor in 1681. After Shivaji's death in 1680 his son and widow continued the power of the Marathas. Within a century the Marathas had replaced the Mughals as South Asia's most powerful empire. However, the mansabdari and zamindari system meant that the empire retained control despite these setbacks. Despite some arguments that the empire began to fall in 1707 with Aurangzeb's death things only really went downhill after 1712 with his son's death.

Mughals and the World

The Mughals were integrated into a global world - originally Turkic they spoke Persian at court and ruled over a variety of peoples. A constant love-hate relationship emerged with the Safavids - both were Islamic empires whose origins were closely linked but this close proximity brought issue. When the Safavids retook Kandahar from the Mughals a painting was issued of Shah Jahan hugging the Safavid shah, and also making the emperor taller than the shah. The Mughals large population, in both the cities and country, allowed the production of many goods which in turn allowed trade. Their position allowed them to engage with both the Silk Road and Indian Ocean trade. Indian ivory, spices and cotton to name a few goods found their way to the Swahili coast in West Africa, China, Indonesia, and Arabia. Relations with the Ottomans were constant and one of Humayun's rebellious brothers were exiled to Mecca. Relations also opened with Europe - Portugal even established themselves in Goa sixteen years before the Mughals established themselves in Delhi. Indian states viewed their sovereignty as ending at the coast where the sea was free game. What can be seen as piracy was even encouraged - out of season fishers would go on raids and return the profits back home which would be collected by the Mughals or even kingdoms through taxes. This differed to the European idea of Mare Nostrum (Our Sea). First Portugal and the later English, French and Dutch wanted a monopoly on sea trade so edged out Indian sailors. Portugal issued a cartaz, or license, to sailors to operate and those without one were declared pirates. This enabled Europeans to edge out local traders or declare Indian enemies pirates. This was also utilized by locals to their advantage. The Mughals managed to convince the English that the Marathan navy was in fact a pirate navy.

A depiction of the British battling the Maratha navy whom they called pirates

Compared to later initial Europeans were respectful to Indian rulers as they were not in the position of power; however, in private they would portray Indians in an Oriental view, just one less derogatory of eighteenth century depictions. Sir Thomas Roe caused outrage in the court when he asked for a chair, for example. Europeans were dependent on local rulers and as a result Europeans were eager to lend their services to Mughals, or others like the Marathas, if it meant that they could get an edge over competitors. The Dutch and English East Indian Companies by the end of the seventeenth century had largely ousted the Portuguese and even the Scottish tried to get involved; bankruptcy through the failed attempt to colonize Panama prevented them from having any form of presence. England established trading posts in Surat (1619), Madras (1639), Bombay (1668), and Calcutta (1690) forming over forty 'factories', heavily armed trading posts, to take part in Indian trade.

The decline of Empire

Due to the length of this post and as I want to expand on this more in two other posts we will only briefly look at the collapse of the Mughals. Crispin Bates has identified seven key factors behind the decline as well as various other smaller ones. English Whig historian T.B. Macauley (1800-59) described the emperors between 1707 and the 1740s as 'a succession of nominal sovereigns sunk in indolence and debauchery, sauntering away life in secluded palaces, chewing bhang, fondling concubines and listening to buffoons' and there is some claim to this despite being very Orientalist. This description is a symptom not a cause of decline although it did aid in it - unable to prevent decline emperors secluded themselves further preventing pushbacks against such decline. After Aurangzeb's death the empire became less centralized so when prosperity dropped mansabdars to ignore Delhi's power and this was made worse by 'tax-farming'. This is when the right to collect taxes was granted to individuals for a limited period in an area except that this was abused with tax-farmers keeping revenue themselves or taking more taxes from the land destroying certain prosperous areas. Meanwhile, the merchant class, which had been growing more and more independent, had started by Aurangzeb's death to cease paying taxes, or even fund opponents. The Marathas and Mysore were just two states to benefit from this and their wars chipped away at the empire. External opponents also affected the empire like the Afghans whose leader, Nadir Shah, sacked Delhi in 1739 and carried away the Peacock Throne. We also see the rise of peasant community rebellions, especially with the Jats, and according to Bates these rebellions differed to earlier ones. Taxation had often been decided following a rebellion but by the late-seventeenth and early-eighteenth centuries rebellions were from the bottom up. Rebellions with no noble leaders prevented negotiated settlements. These several factors were just some of the many factors which caused the decline of the Mughals.

A British depiction of the Battle of Plassey, 1757, which saw Britain formally take over parts of India

Conclusion

The achievement of the Mughals cannot be understated. Turkic in origin, speakers of Persian, and rulers of Hindus and various other religious groups they represent the diversity of South Asia. They were so successful that the attempted successor states and British India adopted the administration and bureaucracy of the Mughals. Today we've only explored a small section of Mughal India; we have hardly explored women, caste, and economics in the empire for one. The Mughals highlight India's diverse origins and this has placed successive Indian governments in an issue in constructing an Indian nation. Under the Mughals South Asia became a powerful state and the explosion of the arts, like the Taj Mahal and Red Fort, have become impossible to intertwine from Indian nationhood. However, as they were made by Muslims the current wave of Hindu nationalism has tried to reinterpret such grandeur and the legacy of the Mughals as being more Hindu than Islamic. The Mughals greatly shaped India and will continue to do so.

The next World History post will focus on the Tokugawa shogunate of Japan and how they shaped Japanese history. The sources I have used are as follows:

-Annemarie Schimmel, The Empire of the Great Mughals: History, Art and Culture, (London: Reaktion Books Ltd., 2004)

-Irfan Habib, (ed.), Akbar and his India, (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1997)

-John Keay, India: A History, (London: HarperCollins, 2000)

-Peter Robb, A History of India, Second Edition, (New York, NY: 2011, Palgrave Macmillan)

-Sugata Bose and Ayesha Jalal, Modern South Asia: History, Culture, Political Economy, (London: 1998, Routledge)

-Crispin Bates, Subalterns and the Raj, South Asia since 1600, (New York, NY: 2007, Routledge)

-Catherine Asher, 'India: The Mughals, 1526-1858', in Jim Masselos, (ed.), The Great Empires of Asia, (London: 2010, Thames & Hudson)

Thank you for reading. For other World History posts please see our list. For future blog updates please see our Facebook or catch me on Twitter @LewisTwiby